IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Milburn v. David Canning Heat and Maintenance Limited, 2018 NSSM 36. -and
|
|
- Benjamin Hutchinson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Milburn v. David Canning Heat and Maintenance Limited, 2018 NSSM 36 Claim No: SCCH BETWEEN: NED (EDWARD) MILBURN Claimant/ Defendant by Counterclaim -and DAVID CANNING HEAT & MAINTENANCE LIMITED Defendant/ Claimant by Counterclaim Ned Milburn Self Represented. Patrick K. O Neil represented the Defendant. Editorial Note: The electronic version of this judgment has been edited for grammar, punctuation and like errors, and addresses and phone numbers have been removed. DECISION (1) On November 20, 2017, the Claimant, Ned Kilburn hired the Defendant, which operates under the business name of DC Heat. The Defendant is a plumbing contractor operated by Mr. Canning. The Claimant hired the Defendant to clear a blocked sewage line on his property. The line could not be cleared using a snake. It was necessary to locate the line and to enable excavation on the property to clear it. The Defendant s location of the line was incorrect and as a result, the excavator, G. & R. Kelly, dug in the wrong place. The excavation company billed the Claimant for all of the digging. The Claimant seeks damages for the portion he claims was unnecessary. The Defendant argues that it did not breach the contract and he was not negligent. He seeks to have the claim dismissed. The Defendant also counterclaims for additional work that was invoiced but not paid.
2 2 (2) At the beginning of the hearing, Mr. O Neil made two motions. The first was to confirm the name of the Defendant was David Canning s company rather than Mr. Canning in his personal capacity. The second was to correct a typographical error increasing the counterclaim from $ to $ Mr. Milburn raised no objections. The motions are granted. The claim against Mr. Milburn in his personal capacity is dismissed without costs. The name of the corporate Defendant is changed to David Canning Heat & Maintenance Limited. The style of cause is amended as set out herein. The Evidence (3) Edward ( Ned ) Milburn testified that he and his wife had lived in the property, 92 Johnstone Avenue (which was formerly known as 78 Johnstone Avenue until the houses were renumbered.) since They hired the Defendant to clear a block in their sewer line, but they were not successful. They attempted to use a snake which proved unsuccessful. DC Heat employed a Rigid Scout sonde and line locator. It indicated the location of the line on the upper half of the driveway near what he calls the rock wall. In fact, the driveway is bordered with gabion baskets, large box-shaped containers framed with heavy wire mesh, containing large quarried gravel inside them. (4) The Claimant hired G. & R. Kelly, who dug where the Scout indicated to uncover a large boulder. They returned the next day with a pneumatic hammer and broke up the rock and discovered there was no pipe beneath it. He testified G. & R. Kelly removed 25 feet of retaining wall over a day and a half only to discover the pipe was not there. He provided a location certificate of the property in evidence and sketched in what he thought was the approximate location of the excavation and the location of the pipe. When the line was discovered, he called Mr. Canning who denied responsibility. (5) Mr. Milburn tendered into evidence photographs of the property along with the property at 58 Johnstone Avenue, his new residence which he also had excavated. Several invoices were issued by G. & R. Kelly. Mr. Milburn asked for a separate invoice describing the portion he alleges to be unnecessary. The work is described on the invoice as Work required to excavate in the wrong location. The amount attributed is $ plus HST of $ for a total of $ Mr. Milburn testified that he is paying that invoice on credit with G. & R. Kelly. In addition, Mr. Milburn provided three landscaping quotes to restore the lawn including the gabion baskets. The lowest quote is $ (6) He reviewed the elements of the Statement of Defense. He acknowledged Mr. Canning attempted to locate the blockage with a snake without success. He declined the suggestion of a more powerful snake considering it unnecessary. He agrees Mr. Canning made no assurances as to the location of the line but he also made no comments as to its possible inaccuracy. He indicated there was no suggestion of digging close to the building until the driveway was removed. Mr. Canning used the Scout twice and both times it pointed to a location beneath the rock. He described Mr. Canning as having great confidence as to its location. (7) Under cross examination, he confirmed Mr. Canning and his employee attended with a snake. He noted they had pulled up tree roots. They discussed the option of using a more powerful snake, but Mr. Canning said it might not work. Mr. Milburn
3 3 concluded the use of a powerful snake was redundant. He confirmed the work at 58 Johnstone Avenue went well without difficulty or disruption of the driveway or rock wall. They discussed the portion of the wall to be dug up. It was estimated to be approximately 9.5 feet deep with a path as wide as the bucket of the excavator. (8) He reviewed the Scout manual and noted a limitation based on the presence of wires. There were wires holding the gabion baskets together, but there was not electricity running through them. He acknowledged he did not call the Halifax Water Commission or other representative of the HRM. He spoke with the HWC representative on-site who advised they do not have line location data. (9) G. & R. Kelly started excavation on November 22, DC Heat was not on-site when the work began. He does not recall Mr. Canning providing any alternative other than when he mentioned digging close to the house. Ultimately, they dug near there. He initially declined on the ground that Mr. Canning advised him the line was under the boulder. (10) Kevin Harvey of G. & R. Kelly brought in the rock breaker. It was not at the recommendation of DC Heat. (11) Mr. Milburn acknowledged receiving the invoice relating to the wrong location two weeks after the work was done. There were no work logs shown. He estimates they spent a full day and a portion of another, approximately a quarter or a half a day. When DC Heat arrived, a portion of the retaining wall had already been excavated. (12) He was shown the DC Heat invoices in Exhibit 4 which form the basis of the counterclaim. He acknowledges authorizing the work to bring the snake and camera and that the work was performed. He was not certain that the invoice 2501 was completed adequately. (13) David Lewis Canning is the owner of DC Heat. He has been a plumber for 41 years. He has used Scouts to locate sewer and water lines for years. He has owned this particular instrument for approximately one year. (14) He described the process of locating a line. Typically when a blockage is found, the plumber uses a snake. If it does not clear, the plumber sends the camera down to locate the blockage. Once it is located, a larger snake with a multi-cutter head is used to break up the blockage or the pipe is excavated to remove the blockage. (15) Mr. Canning testified to receiving a phone call from Ned Milburn. Mr. Milburn was seeking a game plan to clear the line. When he was hired, Mr. Canning s first step was to remove the clean out from the house and snake the line. The auger would not break up the blockage, so they took a reading approximately 15 to 18 feet off the house. Mr. Canning recommended a bigger snake. Mr. Milburn said he wanted it excavated. (16) He described most lines as running straight out to the street. When there are turns in the line, the foot counter on the camera resets to 0. Following that, one counts feet out.
4 4 (17) Once the location was given by the Scout, the intention was for G. & R. Kelly to excavate the property. He noted Mr. Milburn was going to lose a portion of his lawn and retaining wall. (18) When he returned on November 22, G. & R. Kelly was already there. He noted they were close to the rock. He indicated the sounding had come off the rock. He testified he recommended excavation closer to the house. Rather than using the rock breaker, he believes three to four scoops from the backhoe or excavator would have hit the pipe. He referred to his vehicle log which showed him on-site for 18 minutes, around the time the boulder was removed. He also spoke to the invoices in evidence. He confirmed invoice 2501 was the charge to reconnect the water line. (19) Under cross examination, Mr. Canning testified that 21 years of his plumbing experience involved working on ships, which are different than working on residences. He has been trained on the use of the Scout using on-line modules supplied by the company. (20) He described the operation of the Scout relying on sound waves to identify anomalies in the ground. A change of pitch sounds when an object is located. He disagrees the line was found 25 feet from its actual location. The line runs 15 to 18 feet from the foundation. There is a distance of 31 feet to the corner of the driveway. The margin of error is usually a foot to a foot and a half. (21) Mr. Canning testified he volunteered to rescope the line by placing it in front of the boulder. He confirmed the discrepancy is 13 to 16 feet. (22) In redirect evidence, he stated he was there when the line was located and the sewer line was reconnected. He has no idea what caused the blockage. The Law (23) As Mr. O Neil correctly submitted, this is a claim in breach of contract or negligent misrepresentation. The claim does not arise out of what Mr. Milburn paid to the Defendant. Both parties agree no payment is being sought for the work with the Scout. On these facts, it is properly termed as a claim in negligent misrepresentation. (24) Mr. O Neil cites the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal decision in Barrett v. Reynolds (also known as Barrett v. Gaudet), (1998) 170 NSR (2d) 201; 1998 NSCA 2122, where Justice Pugsley stated the following in paras : In Queen v Cognos,[1993] 1 S.C.R. 87 at 110, lacobucci J. (writing for 5 of the 6 judges participating in the appeal) set out five general requirements for liability in negligent misrepresentation: 1. there must be a duty of care based on a "special relationship" between the representor and the representee; 2. the representation in question must be untrue, inaccurate or misleading; 3. the representor must have acted negligently in making the misrepresentation; 4. the representee must have relied, in a reasonable
5 5 manner, on the negligent misrepresentation; and, 5. the reliance must have been detrimental to the representee in the sense that damages resulted. This list of elements is helpful, but it must be remembered that there will often be overlap among the various considerations. In this case, there is considerable overlap between the question of whether Mr. Lohnes' statements were misleading and whether reliance on them was reasonable. (25) For different reasons, as in that case, there is considerable overlap between the considerations. Indeed, it has been my experience that is true of most cases based in negligent misrepresentation. Findings (26) In reviewing the law and evidence in this situation, I make the following findings. (27) The Defendant was hired to locate a blockage in Mr. Milburn s sewer line. The work involved both finding the blockage and, in part, determining the best way to remove it. Typically, the line is snaked with a view to locating the source of the blockage and identifying its cause. The Defendant undertook that process using a regular snake which proved unsuccessful, so a more powerful snake was suggested. Mr. Milburn and Mr. Canning discussed the option. I accept Mr. Milburn s evidence the powerful snake would not guarantee its location. Mr. Milburn had luck from a recent experience with a plumber using a Scout. He opted instead for Mr. Canning to use that. (28) Simply put, the Scout missed the mark. Both attempts at using the apparatus resulted in the Scout registering a reading that the line was located in a significantly different spot than where it was actually located. The Scout came with a disclaimer in its owner s manual indicating its limitations. There is no evidence any of this was shared with Mr. Milburn. According to Mr. Canning, he had the instrument for a year and estimates using one approximately 3 to 4 times per year. Accordingly, I find he had used that particular Scout at most 3 or 4 times. (29) The evidence of Mr. Milburn and Mr. Canning differs markedly in regards to what was proposed on-site. There were workers on-site from G. & R. Kelly and Halifax Water Commission. Mr. Canning had an employee with him. None of those individuals gave evidence. There is no dispute the line was identified using the Scout. The location was wrong. Mr. Milburn hired G. & R. Kelly to excavate the property as a result. (30) In employing the Queen v. Cognos analysis, I agree with Mr. O Neil, it is clear a special relationship exists between the parties. (31) I find the statement or representations in this matter related to the location of the sewer line. Both times, Mr. Canning asserted the line was beneath the boulder, and off to the opposite side of the property from where it was actually located. Mr. O Neil contends that Mr. Canning offered other means to attempt to locate the blockage. For example, both parties recommended a more powerful snake and conceded that the result may be no different. Mr. Canning did not insist on the use of the second snake. He could have explained that the Scout has its limitations as well. Instead, he chose to proceed with its use. I accept Mr. Milburn s evidence that no limitations were explained
6 to him. 6 (32) The primary issue in this case is the standard to be employed. I agree the standard is not one of perfection. However, those who provide statements which are to be relied upon, must also clearly state any reasonable limitations known to them. A statement was made twice that the line was located under the boulder. Mr. Canning s suggestion to dig closer to the house was sensible, but I find on the balance of probabilities it came later in the process. He believed the blockage in the line was 15 to 18 feet out, under the boulder. To arrive at that conclusion, the Defendant used the Scout. There is no evidence of anything wrong with it. I will not speculate if there were bugs to be worked out. However, there are several limitations contained in the manual which Mr. Canning could have provided or explained to Mr. Milburn. As noted, he provided no such recommendations. It is safe to find Mr. Canning s experience with that model was limited to 3 or 4 times based on his estimates. He was certain he knew where the line was located. His representations were sufficient for Mr. Milburn to reasonably rely upon them. They resulted in damages as a result. (33) I find the Defendant liable in negligent misrepresentation. Damages (34) The remaining question is the extent of the damages arising from the work. Mr. Milburn submits a claim of $ for the unnecessary excavation and $ to replace the wall. Nobody from G. & R. Kelly or any of the landscapers gave evidence. (35) Mitigation has not been raised. I find it is not an issue in any event as the work was being done. (36) I find the lawn was torn up as a result of the excavation. I agree with Mr. Canning that the lawn would have been torn up and damage experienced at the wall. While Mr. Milburn attempted to apportion the work done, it is not clear the extent to which this is accurate. Secondly, the rock wall and border is also being replaced. The Milburns purchased the property in 2007, ten years before the work was done. There would be substantial betterment if the property is restored as new. In the circumstances, I allow $7500 for the combined cost of the excavation and restoration together with costs of $ for a total of $ Counterclaim (37) I find the Defendant has proven its counterclaim for both invoices. The work was performed as stipulated with the consent of Mr. Milburn. I allow $ plus costs of $66.00 or $ to be set off against the amount awarded to Mr. Milburn.
7 Summary 7 (38) The Claim is allowed in part. The Counterclaim is allowed. The Claimant, Edward Milburn, shall have judgment against the Defendant as follows: Claim Awarded $ Less: Set Off ($ ) Total Judgment $ (39) An order shall be issued accordingly. Dated at Halifax, NS, on July 20, 2018; Gregg W. Knudsen, Adjudicator Original: Copy: Copy: Court File Claimant (s) Defendant(s)
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citaton: Kirby v. Scotia Structures Inc., 2016 NSSM 62
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citaton: Kirby v. Scotia Structures Inc., 2016 NSSM 62 Claim No: SCCH 447943 BETWEEN: Dr. R. Lee Kirby and Patricia M. Kirby Claimants v. Scotia Structures Inc.
More informationENTRY ORDER 2011 VT 70 SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO JANUARY TERM, 2011
Trombly Plumbing & Heating v. Quinn, Quinn, and Gority 2011 VT 70 [Filed 6-Jul-2011] ENTRY ORDER 2011 VT 70 SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2010-198 JANUARY TERM, 2011 Trombly Plumbing & Heating APPEALED FROM:
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Farran v. Creemer, 2017 NSSM 30 Claim No: SCK 453372 SCCH 436787 BETWEEN: Leonardo Farran Claimant v. Sherrie Creemer, Raymond Wilson, and Resolution
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Kelly v. Wiseman, 2018 NSSM 67. -and
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Kelly v. Wiseman, 2018 NSSM 67 Claim No: SCCH 461253 BETWEEN: MICHAEL KELLY and WENDY KELLY Claimants -and GLENN WISEMAN and NICKEY GLYNN Defendants Andrew
More information[Cite as Skripac v. Kephart, 2002-Ohio-1539.] STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT
[Cite as Skripac v. Kephart, 2002-Ohio-1539.] STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT MICHAEL SKRIPAC, ) ) CASE NO. 01 CA 30 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, ) ) - VS - ) O P I N I O
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bourque Security Services NS v. Maroon Hill Properties Limited, 2018 NSSM 8 REASONS FOR DECISION
BETWEEN: Claim No: SCCH - 472150 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bourque Security Services NS v. Maroon Hill Properties Limited, 2018 NSSM 8 BOURQUE SECURITY SERVICES NS Claimant - and
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Chute v. McCulloch, 2016 NSSM and -
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Chute v. McCulloch, 2016 NSSM 60 Claim: SCCH-454292 Registry: Halifax Between: Joseph Troy Chute Claimant - and - Danny McCulloch and Country Hills Auto
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Seacoast Automotive Ltd. v. Parsons, 2016 NSSM 54 REASONS FOR DECISION
Claim No: SCCH-453678 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Seacoast Automotive Ltd. v. Parsons, 2016 NSSM 54 BETWEEN: SEACOAST AUTOMOTIVE LTD. - and - DANNY PARSONS Claimant Defendant BETWEEN:
More informationRight to sue; In the course of employment (proceeding to and from work).
SUMMARY 892/91 DECISION NO. 892/91 Brunino v. Principe PANEL: McCombie; Thomspon; Nipshagen DATE: 11/05/92 Right to sue; In the course of employment (proceeding to and from work). Two defendants in a civil
More informationTorts, Professional Liability and Expert Evidence. Craig Wallace, P.Eng. CE 402
Torts, Professional Liability and Expert Evidence Craig Wallace, P.Eng. CE 402 Essentials of Tort Law Tort Law Origins Historically dealt with "duty" owed to everyone you haven't agreed with in advance
More informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Groves v. Onda, 2016 NSSC 51. Between: Stephen E. Groves and Janice A. Groves. Wayne Onca LIBRARY HEADING
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Groves v. Onda, 2016 NSSC 51 Date: 20160223 Docket: Truro No. 440175 Registry: Truro Between: Stephen E. Groves and Janice A. Groves v. Wayne Onca Applicants Respondent
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION CHG CONSTRUCTION CO. INC., : Plaintiff : : No. 07-4181 v. : : CAROL A. BLIZZARD, : Original Defendant : : and : : JAMES L. VACCOLA,
More informationAny person violating any provisions of such code shall be punished as provided in section of this code. (Ord. 1004)
ARTICLE 4. PLUMBING CODE 4-401. A) UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE INCORPORATED. There is hereby adopted and incorporated by reference, for the purpose of establishing rules and regulations for the practice of plumbing
More informationSTATE OF MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 82
STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER 82 SECTION 40. The following words, as used in this section and sections 40A to 40E, inclusive, shall have the following meanings: "Company", natural gas pipeline company,
More informationTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA BLONDELLE RICHARDSON WORRELL RICHARDSON. and
CLAIM NO: ANUHCV 2010/0686 BETWEEN: THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA BLONDELLE RICHARDSON WORRELL RICHARDSON Claimants and CLEVELAND SEAFORTH JOYCELYN
More informationBUILDING AMENDMENT ACT 1998 BERMUDA 1998 : 33 BUILDING AMENDMENT ACT 1998
BERMUDA 1998 : 33 BUILDING AMENDMENT ACT 1998 [Date of Assent 17 July 1998] [Operative Date ] WHEREAS it is expedient to amend the Building Act 1988 so as to provide for Building Codes and to make other
More informationIngles v. The Corporation of the City of Toronto Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada dated March 2, 2000
Ingles v. The Corporation of the City of Toronto Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada dated March 2, 2000 (City Council at its regular meeting held on October 3, 4 and 5, 2000, and its Special Meetings
More informationLAKE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 908 LAKEVIEW, OREGON APPLICATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT
LAKE COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 908 LAKEVIEW, OREGON 97630 541-947-6048 COUNTY USE ONLY lakecoroad@co.lake.or.us APPLICATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT LAKE COUNTY, OREGON APPLICANT S NAME: ADDRESS:
More informationPUTNAM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY USE PERMIT APPLICATION
DATE: PUTNAM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RIGHT-OF-WAY USE PERMIT APPLICATION Phone: (386)329-0346 Fax:(386)329-0340 R/W PERMIT No.: DISTRICT: ROAD No. ROAD NAME: (To be completed by Public Works Department)
More informationTown of Wolfville Bylaw 64 Prevention of Excessive Noise By-Law
1. Title This Bylaw is entitled the. 2. Definitions In this By-Law: (1) A-weighted Continuous Noise Level and dba both have the meaning used in Ontario Municipal Model Noise Code (1978); (2) CAO means
More informationPlease note: Retaining walls less than five feet (5') in height do not require a building permit.
APPLICATION PACKET FOR RETAINING WALL COVER SHEET Please note: Retaining walls less than five feet (5') in height do not require a building permit. Project Address Please complete and submit the following:
More informationINDEX. . accountants and actuaries, negligence, . but-for test, factual causation.. but for test, material contribution test, 22-23
INDEX accountants and actuaries. contract, breach of, 157. damages, assessment, 159. duties owed to third parties, 67-68. fiduciary duty, breach of, 157-159. liability, generally, 149. negligence.. duty
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----
Filed 5/21/18 Gudino v. Kalkat CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered
More informationNo IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2001 MT 30 ORLAN AND TRINA STROM, Plaintiffs and Respondents,
No. 00-344 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2001 MT 30 ORLAN AND TRINA STROM, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. ROBERT LOGAN AND ELIZABETH LOGAN, Defendants and Appellants. APPEAL FROM: District
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Ben-Simon v. Capital Auto Sales, 2016 NSSM 34 REASONS FOR DECISION
BETWEEN: Claim No: SCCH-449438 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Ben-Simon v. Capital Auto Sales, 2016 NSSM 34 DANIEL BEN-SIMON Claimant - and - CAPITAL AUTO SALES and 2304606 NOVA SCOTIA
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Eastpoint Engineering Ltd. v. Fisher, 2017 NSSM 51 REASONS FOR DECISION
BETWEEN: Claim No: SCCH - 464447 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Eastpoint Engineering Ltd. v. Fisher, 2017 NSSM 51 EASTPOINT ENGINEERING LTD. Claimant - and - COLIN SCOTT FISHER Defendant
More informationHALIFAX REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY BY- LAW E RESPECTING ENCROACHMENTS UPON, UNDER OR OVER A STREET
HALIFAX REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY BY- LAW E - 200 RESPECTING ENCROACHMENTS UPON, UNDER OR OVER A STREET BE IT ENACTED by the Council of the Halifax Regional Municipality as follows: Number and Short Title
More informationCase Name: Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines
Page 1 Case Name: Beiko v. Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines Between Dr. George Beiko, Dr. Lawrence Aedy, Dr. Bruce Lennox and Dr. Gerald Scaife, Plaintiffs/Respondents, and Hotel Dieu Hospital St. Catharines,
More informationFRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 402. WATER, STORM WATER AND SANITARY SEWER ADMINISTRATION
FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 402. WATER, STORM WATER AND SANITARY SEWER ADMINISTRATION (Ref Ord No 113, 464, 565, 566, 629, 638, 662, 922, 988, 1144, 1156, 1191) 402.01 CITY MANAGER RESPONSIBLE The City Manager
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: LENNON MAPSON AND BERRY JAMES
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES GRENADA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO. GDAHCV2008/0458 BETWEEN: LENNON MAPSON AND BERRY JAMES Claimant Defendant Appearances:
More informationORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS
ORDINANCE NO. 13-16 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DEBARY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY OF DEBARY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDING CHAPTER 1 SECTION 1-3 CONCERNING HEDGE DEFINITION; CHAPTER 2 SECTION 2-5 CONCERNING
More informationCourt of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as Yarmoshik v. Parrino, 2007-Ohio-79.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 87837 VIKTORIYA YARMOSHIK PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. THOMAS
More informationB Y - L A W N U M B E R A BY-LAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF HIGHWAYS IN WINDSOR
B Y - L A W N U M B E R 25-2010 A BY-LAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF HIGHWAYS IN WINDSOR Passed the 1 st day of February, 2010 WHEREAS section 10(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as
More informationBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F DANIEL R. POWELL, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 23, 2009
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F805852 DANIEL R. POWELL, EMPLOYEE MARK FLEMING INDIVIDUALLY OR MARK FLEMING D/B/A F & F, INC., UNINSURED EMPLOYER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT OPINION
More informationTitle 30: Public Service
Title 30: Public Service Chapter 86: Vermont Underground Utility Damage Prevention System 7001. Definitions In this chapter: (1) "Board" means the public service board. (2) "Company" means any public utility
More informationCHAPTER XIV WATER AND SEWERS ARTICLE 1. WATER SERVICE
CHAPTER XIV WATER AND SEWERS ARTICLE 1. WATER SERVICE SECTION 14.0101 DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of Chapter 14, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by
More informationCourt of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as Moore! v. Cranbrook Meadows, 2013-Ohio-4487.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 99621 CARLETON MOORE! PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT vs.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS HAMILTON LYNCH HUNT CLUB LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED October 10, 2013 v No. 312612 Alcona Circuit Court LORRAINE M. BROWN and BIG MOOSE LC No. 10-001662-CZ
More informationLAW REVIEW MAY 1997 NO DUTY TO KEEP PREMISES REASONABLY SAFE FOR ADULT TRESPASSERS. James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D James C.
NO DUTY TO KEEP PREMISES REASONABLY SAFE FOR ADULT TRESPASSERS James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 1997 James C. Kozlowski Landowners generally owe a very limited legal duty of care to adult trespassers. Specifically,
More informationEnergy Conservation in New Building Construction. Uniform Building Code for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings
TITLE 14 Chapter 14.04 Chapter 14.08 Chapter 14.12 Chapter 14.16 Chapter 14.20 Chapter 14.24 Chapter 14.28 Chapter 14.32 Chapter 14.36 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION Building Regulations Moving Buildings Plumbing
More informationOrange County Registrar of Voters. Survey Results 72nd Assembly District Special Election
Orange County Registrar of Voters Survey Results 72nd Assembly District Special Election Executive Summary Executive Summary The Orange County Registrar of Voters recently conducted the 72nd Assembly
More informationBylaw No. 859/07 CONSOLIDATED WORKING COPY
CONSOLIDATED WORKING COPY A BYLAW OF THE TOWN OF NIPAWIN FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT OF THE WATERWORKS AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS The Council of the Town of Nipawin in the Province of Saskatchewan,
More informationReadopt with amendment Env-Wq , eff (doc. #9188), to read as follows:
FP 2008-194 Adopted 12/19/08 1 NOTE: The following sections AMEND Env-Wq 1400, as follows: - Text marked as Readopt with amendment or Amend must be used IN PLACE OF the corresponding language in Env-Wq
More informationHANDOUT FOR MULMUR TOWNSHIP RATEPAYERS SWIMMING POOLS AND FENCES May 01, 2013
HANDOUT FOR MULMUR TOWNSHIP RATEPAYERS SWIMMING POOLS AND FENCES May 01, 2013 Council has established rules for fencing swimming pools that meet (and in some ways exceed) the minimum requirements of the
More informationTownship of SLIPPERY ROCK BUTLER COUNTY
Streets and Sidewalks Chapter 21 Township of SLIPPERY ROCK BUTLER COUNTY Pennsylvania Adopted: 1954. Amended 1974, 1992, 2002 REVISION: Chapter 21: Streets and Sidewalks (Revision page started year 2011)
More informationHOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. Fence Construction Guidelines
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Fence Construction Guidelines May 29, 2012 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Dear Whispering Hills Homeowner, Thank you for your willingness to abide by the fencing guidelines of the Whispering
More informationORDINANCE NO. 12 THE TOWN BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE TOWN OF WHITE BEAR ORDAINS:
ORDINANCE NO. 12 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 12 OF THE TOWN OF WHITE BEAR, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA, ADOPTED FEBRUARY 4, 1960, AS AMENDED, BEING AN ORDINANCE REGULATING RATES AND WATER SERVICE
More informationHALIFAX REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY BY-LAW NUMBER T-600 BY- LAW RESPECTING TREES ON PUBLIC LANDS
HALIFAX REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY BY-LAW NUMBER T-600 BY- LAW RESPECTING TREES ON PUBLIC LANDS BE IT ENACTED by the Council of the Halifax Regional Municipality, under the authority of the Halifax Regional
More informationOFFICE CONSOLIDATION FENCE BY-LAW BY-LAW NUMBER By-Law Number Date Passed Section Amended
OFFICE CONSOLIDATION FENCE BY-LAW BY-LAW NUMBER 119-05 Passed by Council on November 28, 2005 Amendments: By-Law Number Date Passed Section Amended 55-07 April 23, 2007 Delete Private Swimming Pool Definition
More informationDECLARATION OF PARTY WALL AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT
PREPARED BY AND AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Michael L. Michetti, Esq. Woods, Weidenmiller & Michetti, PL 5150 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH, SUITE 603 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 (239) 325-4070 DECLARATION OF PARTY WALL
More information2012 District of Columbia Code Chapter 27 Underground Facilities Protection (Section to Section ) Section Definitions Section
Chapter 27 Underground Facilities Protection (Section 34-2701 to Section 34-2709) Section 34-2701 Definitions Section 34-2702 Formation and operation of 1-call center Section 34-2703 Availability of permit
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Sherri A. Falor, : Appellant : : v. : No. 90 C.D. 2014 : Submitted: September 11, 2014 Southwestern Pennsylvania Water : Authority : BEFORE: HONORABLE MARY HANNAH
More informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Dalhousie University v. Cogeneration and Energy Management Engineering Inc., 2017 NSSC 303
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Dalhousie University v. Cogeneration and Energy Management Engineering Inc., 2017 NSSC 303 Date: 20171128 Docket: Hfx No. 458586 Registry: Halifax Between: Dalhousie
More informationCITY OF THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SPECIFICATIONS / ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMITS. Encroachment Permit # Project #
CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SPECIFICATIONS / ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMITS Encroachment Permit # Project # Applicant/Applicant Signature City Inspector City Drawing #
More informationMUNICIPALITY OF EAST HANTS BYLAW NUMBER P-100
MUNICIPALITY OF EAST HANTS BYLAW NUMBER P-100 WHEREAS Part III, Section 172(1) of the Municipal Government Act, R.S.N.S. 1998, c. 18 enables the council of a Municipality to control nuisance in the Municipality,
More informationREGULATIONS FOR THE VILLAGE OF NORTH CHEVY CHASE
REGULATIONS FOR THE VILLAGE OF NORTH CHEVY CHASE CHAPTER 3 BUILDING PERMITS Article 1. General Provisions Section 3-101 Definitions Section 3-102 Applicable Requirements Article 2. Village Building Permits
More informationTOWN OF BELMONT NEW HAMPSHIRE DRIVEWAY REGULATIONS. Wording to be eliminated is crossed out Wording to be added is bold, italicized
TOWN OF BELMONT NEW HAMPSHIRE DRIVEWAY REGULATIONS Wording to be eliminated is crossed out Wording to be added is bold, italicized ENACTED: MARCH 9, 1992 EDITION: TBD (Draft Date 6/7/18) TABLE OF CONTENTS
More informationCONSOLIDATED WITH BY-LAW THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MULMUR BY-LAW NO FENCE BY-LAW
CONSOLIDATED WITH BY-LAW 17-2013 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MULMUR BY-LAW NO. 14-2006 FENCE BY-LAW WHEREAS the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, s. 8, provides that a Municipality has the capacity,
More informationTITLE XV: LAND USAGE CHAPTER 150: BUILDING REGULATIONS
Rochester, Indiana Code of Ordinances TITLE XV: LAND USAGE CHAPTER 150: BUILDING REGULATIONS CHAPTER 150: BUILDING REGULATIONS General Provisions 150.001 Enforcement of building standards state law adopted
More informationCitation: Queens Co. Const. v Currie Date: PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION
Citation: Queens Co. Const. v Currie Date: 20010726 PESCTD 69 Docket: GSC-15779 Registry: Charlottetown PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION BETWEEN: AND: QUEENS COUNTY
More informationORDINANCE NO GAS FRANCHISE
ORDINANCE NO. 1161 GAS FRANCHISE AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NEW MEXICO GAS COMPANY, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ITS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, SUCCESSORS, LESSEES AND ASSIGNS, GRANTEE HEREIN, CERTAIN POWERS,
More information[2] The collision took place along Hans Strydom Drive, Pretoria, between. vehicles with registration numbers PXK 479 GP, and HMH 030 GP, driven by
2 [2] The collision took place along Hans Strydom Drive, Pretoria, between vehicles with registration numbers PXK 479 GP, and HMH 030 GP, driven by the plaintiff and the defendant, respectively. [3] Both
More informationTITLE 12 BUILDING, UTILITY, ETC. CODES 1
Change 2, September 15, 2015 12-1 TITLE 12 BUILDING, UTILITY, ETC. CODES 1 CHAPTER 1. BUILDING CODE. 2. PLUMBING CODE. 3. FUEL GAS CODE. 4. ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE. 5. MECHANICAL CODE. 6. RESIDENTIAL
More informationOntario Superior Court of Justice. Goderich Small Claims Court. Matthew Gascho. and. The Corporation of the Town of Clinton. Reasons for Judgment
Ontario Superior Court of Justice Claim Number 24-2000 Between: Goderich Small Claims Court Matthew Gascho and The Corporation of the Town of Clinton Plaintiff Defendant Counsel: Background: Philip B.
More informationORDINANCE NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN OF LONGBOAT KEY, FLORIDA, THAT:
ORDINANCE 04-12 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE TOWN OF LONGBOAT KEY, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 150, BUILDINGS, 150.01 BY ADOPTING THE FLORIDA BUILDING
More informationTHE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL BY-LAW NUMBER A by-law to regulate the Municipal Drinking Water System of the Regional Municipality of Peel
THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF PEEL BY-LAW NUMBER 6-2017 A by-law to regulate the Municipal Drinking Water System of the Regional Municipality of Peel WHEREAS the Region operates the Municipal Drinking Water
More informationDIVIDING FENCES. A self-help kit about the law of building and maintaining fences between neighbours
DIVIDING FENCES A self-help kit about the law of building and maintaining fences between neighbours Caxton Legal Centre Inc. Copyright Caxton Legal Centre Inc. 1 Manning Street South Brisbane Qld 4101
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Molnar v. BMW Canada Inc., 2017 NSSM 24 REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
BETWEEN: Claim No: SCCH - 461264 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Molnar v. BMW Canada Inc., 2017 NSSM 24 REBECCA MOLNAR - and - Claimant BMW CANADA INC. Defendant REASONS FOR DECISION
More informationSLIP OPINION NO OHIO- THE STATE EX REL. SUNESIS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, APPELLANT,
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Sunesis Constr. Co. v. Indus. Comm., Slip Opinion No. 2018-Ohio-.] NOTICE This slip opinion is
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE July 7, 2010 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE July 7, 2010 Session ENGLISH MOUNTAIN RETREAT, LLC, ET AL. v. SUSANNE CRUSENBERRY-GREGG, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Knox County No. 2-471-07
More informationINTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISS 10M
INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISS 10M IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION BY THE ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY AUTHORITY FOR APPROVAL TO EFFECT PARTIAL CLOSURE OF A SECTION OF THE ST. LAWRENCE RIVER BETWEEN TOUSSAINT ISLAND
More informationBowen Island Municipality. Snug Cove Sewer Regulation Bylaw No. 46, 2002
Bowen Island Municipality Snug Cove Sewer Regulation Bylaw No. 46, 2002 CONSOLIDATED FOR CONVENIENCE JULY 2005 Amendment Bylaw Date of Adoption Bylaw No. 106, 2004 November 8, 2004 The amendment bylaws
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs November 21, 2005
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs November 21, 2005 THE CADCO, LLC, ET AL. v. OLIVER A. BARRY, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sumner County No. 23858-C C. L.
More informationSUMMARY OF PLEADINGS, DOCUMENTS AND INVESTIGATION
: JAMES LIABRAATEN : BEFORE THE : SCHOOL ETHICS COMMISSION v. : : PETER EMERY, : WEST MORRIS REGIONAL BOARD : Docket No. C14-08 OF EDUCATION : PROBABLE CAUSE NOTICE MORRIS COUNTY : : This matter arises
More informationCircuit Court for Baltimore City Case No.: 24-C UNREPORTED. Nazarian, Reed, Fader,
Circuit Court for Baltimore City Case No.: 24-C-16-005327 UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1811 September Term, 2017 KATRINA MEGGINSON v. THE CITY OF BALTIMORE AND THE MAYOR &
More informationCHAPTER 9 BUILDING REGULATIONS
CHAPTER 9 BUILDING REGULATIONS ARTICLE 1 BUILDING INSPECTOR SECTION 9-101: POWERS AND AUTHORITY SECTION 9-102: RIGHT OF ENTRY SECTION 9-103: INSPECTIONS SECTION 9-104: APPEAL FROM DECISION SECTION 9-105:
More informationVerizon N.Y., Inc. v Consolidated Edison, Inc NY Slip Op 32094(U) September 6, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2006 Judge:
Verizon N.Y., Inc. v Consolidated Edison, Inc. 2013 NY Slip Op 32094(U) September 6, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 113564/2006 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,
More informationREGULATION OF THE SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT OF WAUKEE, IOWA, PROVISIONS FOR SEWER RENTAL AND REGULATION CONNECTIONS WITH THE CITY SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM.
REGULATION OF THE SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT OF WAUKEE, IOWA, PROVISIONS FOR SEWER RENTAL AND REGULATION CONNECTIONS WITH THE CITY SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM. 204.1 Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to
More informationContract and Tort Law for Engineers
Contract and Tort Law for Engineers Christian S. Tacit Tel: 613-599-5345 Email: ctacit@tacitlaw.com Canadian Systems of Law There are two systems of law that operate in Canada Common Law and Civil Law
More informationDT VERIZON NEW HAMPSHIRE. Complaint of Michael Harris. Order Dismissing Complaint O R D E R N O. 24,440. March 4, 2005
DT 03-153 VERIZON NEW HAMPSHIRE Complaint of Michael Harris Order Dismissing Complaint O R D E R N O. 24,440 March 4, 2005 APPEARANCES: Michael Harris, pro se; Kevin Shea on behalf of Verizon; and Amy
More informationSUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bresson v.nova Scotia (Community Services), 2016 NSSC 64. v. Nova Scotia (Department of Community Service)
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bresson v.nova Scotia (Community Services), 2016 NSSC 64 Date: 20160118 Docket: SYD No. 443281 Registry: Sydney Between: Jainey Lee Bresson v. Nova Scotia (Department
More informationA. PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES A. PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES
23 3360-A. PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES 23 3360-A. PROTECTION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES 1. Definitions. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise indicates, the following terms shall
More information- and - ( Complainant ) Mariana Cowan Real Estate Limited ( Respondent ) The Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission DECISION OF THE BOARD OF INQUIRY
IN THE MATTER OF: The Nova Scotia Human Rights Act - and - IN THE MATTER OF: BETWEEN: Board File No. 51000-30-H13-2584 Robert Morris ( Complainant ) - and - Mariana Cowan Real Estate Limited ( Respondent
More informationINSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR FIBER OPTIC CABLE LICENSE
INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICATION FOR FIBER OPTIC CABLE LICENSE 1. Complete application. 2. Submit application with $200 check to location below or by email. Make check payable to City of Clive. Clive Public
More informationSTREET USE AND MAINTENANCE
CHAPTER 135 135.01 Removal of Warning Devices 135.07 Washing Vehicles 135.02 Obstructing or Defacing 135.08 Burning Prohibited 135.03 Placing Debris On 135.09 Excavations 135.04 Playing In 135.10 Maintenance
More informationGOODS & SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ORDINARY MAINTENANCE. between the City of and
GOODS & SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ORDINARY MAINTENANCE between the City of and [Insert Vendor's Co. Name] THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of, a Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE April 4, 2006 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE April 4, 2006 Session NORTHEAST KNOX UTILITY DISTRICT v. STANFORT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, SOUTHERN CONSTRUCTORS, INC., and AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION,
More informationTITLE 2 BUILDING AND FIRE REGULATION
TITLE 2 BUILDING AND FIRE REGULATION Chapter 2-1: International Building Code Chapter 2-2: General Building Regulations Chapter 2-3: National Electrical Code and Regulations Chapter 2-4: National Plumbing
More informationCourt of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as Fedarko v. Cleveland, 2014-Ohio-2531.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 100223 SALLY A. FEDARKO, ET AL. PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES
More informationARTICLE 905 Street Excavations. EDITOR S NOTE: Resolution , passed February 3, 2009, established street excavation fees.
ARTICLE 905 Street Excavations EDITOR S NOTE: Resolution 13-2009, passed February 3, 2009, established street excavation fees. (View Fees) 905.01 Definitions. 905.02 Permit required and emergency openings.
More informationLast Revised Nov. 26, 2012 Sheet Effective Jan. 1, 2013 B/L 5793
Last Revised Nov. 26, 2012 Sheet 1 5675 Effective Jan. 1, 2013 B/L 5793 CONSOLIDATION OF A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF LETHBRIDGE PASSED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAFETY CODES ACT OF ALBERTA **********************************************************
More information2.3 The National Electrical Code may be examined at any state publications depository library.
1.0 STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE 1.1 Following are the adopted changes in the Rules and Regulations of the Colorado State Electrical Board, for general clarification, for efficient management and expeditious
More informationCITY OF SACRAMENTO BUILDING MOVE ORDINANCE REVISIONS
CITY OF SACRAMENTO DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 1231 "I" Street Sacramento, Ca. 95814 December 9, 1985 Administration Room 300 449-5571 Building Inspections Room 200 449-5716 Planning Room 200
More informationCITY OF YORKTON BYLAW NO. 14/2018 COPY
CITY OF YORKTON BYLAW NO. 14/2018 A BYLAW OF THE CITY OF YORKTON IN THE PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN RESPECTING INSTALLATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND SERVICING PROCEDURES AND RATES FOR WATERWORKS SEWER AND WATER
More informationENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL HEARING BOARD
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL HEARING BOARD The Indian River County (IRC) Environmental Control Hearing Board (the Board) held a meeting at the County Administration Building, Commission Chambers, 1801 27 th Street,
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Mark Jacques Custom Upholstery v. Buchanan, 2017 NSSM 63
IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: Mark Jacques Custom Upholstery v. Buchanan, 2017 NSSM 63 Claim: SCAR and SCY No.456460 Registry: Yarmouth Between: MARK JACQUES CUSTOM UPHOLSTERY CLAIMANT
More informationFor a permit to work within the County Highway Right-of-way (ROW), please provide the following:
KURT OSPELT Highway Superintendent COUNTY OF OSWEGO HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 31 SCHAAD DRIVE OSWEGO, NEW YORK 13126 TELEPHONE (315) 349-8331 (315) 349-8330 FAX (315) 349-8256 For a permit to work within the
More informationEscalera v SNC-Lavalin, Inc NY Slip Op 30765(U) March 21, 2018 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Howard H.
Escalera v SNC-Lavalin, Inc. 2018 NY Slip Op 30765(U) March 21, 2018 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: 301889/11 Judge: Howard H. Sherman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY
More informationIN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: MacFarlane v. Digital Glam Film Group, 2016 NSSM 12 REASONS FOR DECISION
BETWEEN: Claim No: 446535 IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Cite as: MacFarlane v. Digital Glam Film Group, 2016 NSSM 12 ROBYN MACFARLANE and STEPHEN BOUDREAU Claimants - and - DIGITAL GLAM FILM
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE December 11, 2007 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE December 11, 2007 Session ROBERT A. WARD and wife, SALLY WARD, v. CITY OF LEBANON, TENNESSEE; CITY OF LEBANON GAS DEPARTMENT; JAMES N. BUSH CONSTRUCTION,
More information